introduction to risk assessment and management in developing countries

Introduction to risk assessment and management in developing countries

Scira Menoni– Politecnico di Milano

Index

1. Risk mitigation as part of sustainable development

2. Urban areas at risk in developed and developing countries

3. Basic components of risk definition

4. Conditions of multirisk/multihazard

5. What can be done? Mitigation measures

6. How assessment tools support mitigation measures

RISK PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT FROM A SPATIAL AND LAND USE PLANNING PERSPECTIVE

1 Introduction to the course

2Risk assessment tools: definining hazard, exposure, vulnerability and risk in the context of seismic risk

3 Risk assessment tools: scenarios versus PRA modelling

4 Case studies: Kobe earthquake, Boumedere (Algeria), Izmit (Turkey)

5Multirisk perspective: multihazard and multirisk. A map of hotspots by the World Bank

6Long term risk mitigation measures (non structural): land use planning in the context of megacities and remote areas

7Reconstruction following disasters: linking rehabilitation to development. Experiences from the EU Community Mechanism

8 Short term mitigation measures: contingency planning and crisis managment

9 Short term mitigation measures: increasing the coping capacity of communities

10Tools for risk mitigation measures implementation. Differencies between developed and developing countires

Idea of the course: provide the basic concepts of risk analysis, risk assessment, risk mitigation and prevention in an international context and as a development issue

World wide natural disastersWorld wide natural disasters(Source: Munich Re, 2005)

World wide cost of natural World wide cost of natural disastersdisasters

(Source: Munich Re, 2005)

0

5000000

10000000

15000000

20000000

25000000

1900 1950 2000 2050

Wild Fires2%

Wave / Surge

0%

Volcano0%

Slides1%

Eart hquake

22%

Ext reme Temperat

ure5%

Drought8%

Wind St orm24%

Flood38%

The cost of natural disasters in The cost of natural disasters in EuropeEurope

Damage in US $ (,000). Source CRED EM-DAT (from 5 to 20 bn US $/y)

Country Total cost

(million US $)

% GDP

1 Japan 4000 0,08

2 India 1000 0,20

3 Italy 1000 0,079

4 USA 1000 0,009

5 China 500 0,037

6 Spain 220 0,034

7 Canada 225 0,029

8 Swedish 15 0,005

9 Hong Kong 25

10 New Zealand 12

11 Norway 6

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

Japa

n

Indi

a

Ital

y

US

A

Chi

na

Spa

in

Can

ada

Sw

edis

h

Hon

g K

ong

New

Zea

land

Nor

way

cost

(M

illi

on

of

US

$)

0

0,05

0,1

0,15

0,2

0,25

% G

NP

* GDP is 2000 data, while the total cost is an average value coming from variuos sources, manily Schuster, 1999 and CNR/GNDCI. Canadian losses are from P. Bobrowsky (Head, Canada Landslide Loss Reduction Program)

Yearly cost for landslides damage in some Countries and comparison Yearly cost for landslides damage in some Countries and comparison with GDP*with GDP*

Slides1%

Volcano1%

Wild Fires0%

Wave / Surge

2%

Wind Storm11%

Flood66%

Earthquake

19%

World – (1900-2004) Source CRED EM DAT Earthquake87%

Flood5%

Slides2%

Volcano1% Wave / Surge

0%

Wind Storm5%

Wild Fires0%

Europe - Source CRED EM DAT (1900-2004)volcanic eruption

1%

tidal storm0,5%

flooding13%

heavy rainfall7%

landslide4%fires

0,23%

earthquake75%

Italy - Victims last 50 yy (Source ENEA)

Japan - Victims 1967-2002

Victims in world, Europe, Japan and ItalyVictims in world, Europe, Japan and Italy

How are development and risk linked?How are development and risk linked?

Source UNEP

Disaster risk is lower in high development countries than in low development countries.

Development processes intervene in the translation of physical exposure to hazards into disaster risk

Earthquakes: countries with rapid urban growthTropical cyclones: countries with large rural populations and a low rank on the Human Development Index (HDI). Floods: countries with low GDP per capita and low local population densities

Urban areas and megacities at risk

Developed countries

Developing countriesFig. 3. Percentage of the number of disasters registered from 1900until 1999 by regions of the world (Source: EM-DAT database).

Why the increasing trends?Why the increasing trends?

• More people and more complex societies– Great concentrations of people in

urban areas• More structure – much of its aging

– Particularly in urban areas• Choices – where to live, work, play and travel

– Urbanization of societies – most along coasts and rivers• Human intervention in the environment

– Emission of pollutants and greenhouse gases

It is estimated that natural disaster losses will increase dramatically over the next 50 years. The global cost of natural disasters is anticipated to top $300 billion annually by 2050 (UNISDR 2001). Two broad demographic trends directly impact the increasing losses from natural hazards in the developing world: population growth and the concentration of populations in megacities.

increasing vulnerability?increasing vulnerability?

Economic losses due to natural hazards in the years 1950-2002(Source: Munich-Re)

Comparison between losses and number of event in the last 40 years

0,00E+00

5,00E+05

1,00E+06

1,50E+06

2,00E+06

2,50E+06

'50-'59 '60-'69 '70-'79 '80-'89 '90-'99 '00-'05

decenni

mor

ti

0,00E+00

1,00E+08

2,00E+08

3,00E+08

4,00E+08

5,00E+08

6,00E+08

'50-'59 '60-'69 '70-'79 '80-'89 '90-'99 '00-'05

decenni

dann

i in

$

Figure 1 e 2: confronto fra numero dei morti e danni nel periodo 1950-2005 in UE, America, Asia, Africa. Fonte dati: EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database- www.em-dat.net. Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels - Belgium

Comparison between death toll and economic losses worldwide

We may go on with data and statistics, but let’s stop here and point out that:

* Natural hazards have always been a major issue (when disaster stroke) and still are, though with a slight change in the relative proportion of death toll and economic losses;

* Victims and losses are unevenly distributed in the developed and developing world;

* There are other causes besides events’ severity to explain victims and losses (exposure and vulnerability)

You cannot reach sustainability without risk prevention. Why?

Without prevention you put at risk present and future generations

Costs of repair (and human and economic harm) is unduly paid by large sectors of society, particularly in developing countries

Many times unsustainable practices also increase risk

SAFETY RISK

SAFETY RISK

A definition of safety:

A dynamic ‘non-event’

(Karl Weick)

What kind of risks?

Connected to events for which a clear impact zone and time of occurrence can be identified

What risk is all about?

1. It is about assigning

probabilities to events

2. About comparing

negativities

3. About establishing

thresholds

Problems:1. Not enough historical data2. Enough historical data but not enough knowledge regarding the phenomena3. Subjective rather than objective probabilities

Assigning probabilities to events

Problems:1. Subjective probabilities are influenced by experience2. Social perception is the issue 3. Public versus private risks

Comparing negativities

Problems:1. What are the criteria?2. How criteria are related to the way risks are measured? 3. Who decides?

Deciding thresholds of acceptable risk

minor consequence

major consequences

RISK

thre

sh

oldsmall

probabilitieslargeprobabilities

Acceptable thresholds cannot be derivedfrom estimated probabilities

You should estimate not only the hazard but also the vulnerabilities

&

minor consequences

majorconsequences

RISK

THR

ESHO

LD

1. Because acceptable thresholds can’t be derived from probabilities;

2. Because risks are context-related;

3. Because you can’t separate social, political, economic and technical issues properly

1. You can’t rely on one discipline only;

2. You need both analytical and synthetic views of problems

it is a matter of “Mandated science”(L. Salter, 1988)

Technical expertise Social sciences* Analytical * Synthetic* Quantitative models * Rarely or

poorly (mainly for the hazard) quantitative* Poorly context related * Context sensitive

(vulnerability)

What can be done to mitigate risks?

Risk assessment

Risk mitigation measures: structural and non structural, long and short term

Implementation tools: laws, regulations, directives, economic tools –insurance, incentives, taxes- voluntary….

Hazard Vulnerability

Risk

1

D = f( y, V) d(y)

0

RISK = HAZARD * VULNERABILITY (Exposed systems)

Hazard Vulnerability

Risk

RISK = HAZARD * VULNERABILITY (Exposed systems)

RISK measured in terms of expected damage

HAZARD = characteristics of the dangerous agent (phenomena)

VULNERABILITY= propensity to damage, fragility

(Exposed systems)= number and dimension of people and goods in a dangerous area

Brief definition

In developing countries….

More EXPOSURE

More VULNERABILITY

More HAZARD

RISK measured in terms of expected damage

Furthermore, multiple threats are not so uncommon, unfortunately many times in megacities in developing countries

While the vulnerability of small states, particularly islands should not be disregarded (lack of resources)


Risk assessment



RISK PREVENTION

(OR MITIGATION?)

Short term measures

Long term measures

Risk prevention measures

Land use planning Structural measures

* re-develpment

* restauration

* relocation

* zoning

Support to implementation

* Disclosure

* Insurance; * tax incentives; * td/p rights

* Communication

Risk assessment tools(to feed prevention measures)

Hazard Exposure Physical vulnerability

Systemicvulnerability

Socio-economic

vulnerability

PRA

Complete event scenario

Deterministic scenario

Risk m

itigation measures: structural and non structural, long and short term

Structural measures dealing with hazards

Structural measures dealing with physical vulnerability

Non structural measures addressing exposure reduction

Non structural measures addressing social and economic vulnerabilities

Non structural measures to mitigate the vulnerability of the built environment

Non structural measures to mitigate environmental vulnerabilities

- buildings consolidation - buildings codes

- land use planning to avoid the most hazardous zones - preparedness programs - land use planning

- preserving diversity in agricoltural activities

- levees, outlets, etc.- buildings retrofit codes

- relocation from the most critical areas

- education, training of various public sectors

- locational decisions regarding public services and infrastructures

- tailoring agricoltural practices to the type of soil/terrain

- avalanches defence

- norms to secure public facilities, factories etc.

- insurance integrated to land use planning

- development of programs with the media

- protection of marsh areas, humid zones, shoreline dunes, etc.

- landslide cosolidation

- lava flows diversion- buildings usability checks - evacuation

- improvement of civil protection organisational capabilities

- accessibility to services and to potentially damaged areas

- sustainable practices in lava, water flows diversion

- sandbags and barriers to inundating waters

- temporary repairs particularly for lifelines

- business continuity plans also for the public sector

- fires control

- use of the media to dispatch emergency messages

lon

g t

erm

mit

igat

ion

mea

sure

ssh

ort

ter

m m

itig

atio

n m

easu

res

rural to urban (development)

Transform land uses urban to urban (restoration, redevelopment)

urban to rural

Planners do different things in Europe dealing with spatial planning; summarizing and comprising different schools of thought and practice:

rural to rural

Preserve land uses urban to urban

Land use planning must be considered in a wider context

Wider context of development and redevelopment (so in developing countries specific factors pertaining for example to illegal/self construction and financial constraints must be considered)

Wider context of sustainibility (how development and land use planning may support environmentally sustainible practices and compatible with ecosystems)

Is risk prevention part of sustainibility?

land use planning in hazardous areas

Land use planning in hazardous areas

include as a crucial objective risk prevention (in order to maintain the same assets needed for people’s life, social and economic future)

as part of ordinary activities

should the community consider this essential (community? other actors?)

the “tragic choices” dilemma

prevention is neither economically (discount rate) nor politically convenient

land use planning in hazardous areas

Where: hazards, exposure and vulnerabilities are high

How? Depend on risk assessment for planning purposes

Densities and concentration of: hazards, exposure and vulnerabilities

Type of land uses: influencing hazards, exposure and vulnerabilities (including type of population)

land use planning in hazardous areasphysical component: hazards, physical vulnerability (to multiple stressors)

Densities, concentration and specific features of: hazards, exposure and vulnerabilities

social and economic vulnerabilities:-population (features, prepared.)- institutions/organisations-economic structure/activities

systems complexity – inter-dependency; interconnectedness; non linear relations

A fram

ework to address land use and spatial planning decisions

land uses in the plannatural/ rural urban

physical vulnerability:- different types of

agricoltural uses-different types of soil uses

type of hazard- seismic (Se) - floods (Flo) - landslides (L)- volcanic (VO) - avalanches (A) -forest fires (F)

physical vulnerability:- urban fabric- industrial/ commercial buildings- network infrastructures- strategic equipments

socio-economic copingcapacity:-economic activities-age classes- trend of abandonment

urban coping capacity:- economic activities- network infrastructures- strategic equipmentssocial coping capcity:- age classes- handicapped

Hazard intensity Hazard frequency

risk assessment (expectedphysical damage:

matrixes fragility curves

multirisk synthesis table:

H, Vexp, R, CC, Na-tech

Chain Na-Na

land use preservation land use transformation

IncreasesHazard?

IncreasesVulnerability?

compatibility table and map

criteria based on H,V,R

land useacceptable

land use notacceptable

mitigation measures toreduce Hazard(s)

mitigation measures toreduce Vulnerability

mitigation measures toincrease coping capacity

reduces copingcapacity?

future?

land uses in the plannatural/ rural urban

physical vulnerability:- different types of

agricoltural uses-different types of soil uses

type of hazard- seismic (Se) - floods (Flo) - landslides (L)- volcanic (VO) - avalanches (A) -forest fires (F)

physical vulnerability:- urban fabric- industrial/ commercial buildings- network infrastructures- strategic equipments

socio-economic copingcapacity:-economic activities-age classes- trend of abandonment

urban coping capacity:- economic activities- network infrastructures- strategic equipmentssocial coping capcity:- age classes- handicapped

Hazard intensity Hazard frequency

risk assessment (expectedphysical damage:

matrixes fragility curves

multirisk synthesis table:

H, Vexp, R, CC, Na-tech

Chain Na-Na

land use preservation land use transformation

IncreasesHazard?

IncreasesVulnerability?

compatibility table and map

criteria based on H,V,R

land useacceptable

land use notacceptable

mitigation measures toreduce Hazard(s)

mitigation measures toreduce Vulnerability

mitigation measures toincrease coping capacity

reduces copingcapacity?

future?

ZONING SUBDIVISION STANDARDS BUILDING CODES

A. Special seismic study zone A. Performance standards for A. Supplemental seismic standards sensitive lands

B. Open space/conservation B. Standards and regulations for B. Standards to be introduced in zones new development areas building codes

C. No-building zones C. Regulations and codes for C. Seismic standards for urban renewal retrofitting residential buildings

HAZARDOUS BUILDINGS STRATEGIC PUBLIC LIFELINESABATEMENT ORDINANCE FACILITIES

A. Abatement ordinance for A. Abatement ordinance for public A. Substitution of old lifelines in risky plants facilities in dangerous areas dangerous areas

C. Increase the mutual distance B. Relocation of strategic facilities B. Retrofitting of lifelines in the between dangerous facilities and from dangerous areas most vulnerable situations residential areas

B. Incentives to relocate industrial C. New public facilities in safer C. New infrastructures in safer plants in dangerous sites areas areas

INSURANCE PROPERTY ACQUISITION or TAX CREDITSPURCHASE DEVELOP. RIGHTS A. Tax benefits for those who

retrofit their house A. Insurance programs for goods A. Property voluntary acquisition or B. Incentives for those relocating exposed to risks expropriation from dangerous areas B. Insurance programs not only B. Purchase or expropriation of REAL ESTATE for private citizens but also for development rights DISCLOSURE local/provincial authorities A. Obliging contractors disclose

risk to potential buyers B. Particular conditions on selling and buying contracts

Wa

ys t

o r

edu

ce p

hys

ica

l vu

lner

ab

ilit

yW

ays

to

red

uce

sys

tem

ic

vuln

era

bil

ity

Eco

no

mic

typ

e o

f to

ols

TYPE OF SETTLEMENT

new development already built area

H

compatibility assessment decision concernig the

A of the new development priority to assign in

NATURAL in the hazardous area, reducing expected levels

Z given possible mitigation of damage

measures

A

R

decisions concerning decisions regarding the

D existing the new development close possibility/opportunity

to an existing technological to change the settlement

hazard: is it desirable? or to modify/relocate

T the plant

TECHNOLOGICALY

compatibility of the new building a new plant should

P to be located plant with the present and undergo a careful and

future land use in the area detailed risk assessment

E (trying to avoid conflicts and environemntal impact over land use) analysis procedure

Description Needed assessment input Risk factors managed by the tool

Positive aspects Critical aspects

Redevelopment. Integration with existing/designed structural measures should be foreseen; residual risk assessed and tackled

redevelopment with substantial rebuilding

* hazard, *vulnerability, *exposure


gives the opportunity to re-design the area, build less densely, more resistant structures, rethink accessibility and facilities

costly; private interest needed, easier during reconstruction

* buildings specify norms to deal with physical vulnerability

vulnerability assessment for existing hazards (to be developed)

physical vulnerability reduces substantially fatalities and economic damage

a strong public motivation needed to support and control implementation (further research needed too)

* networks as for buildings assessment tool * industries as for buildings specific tools needed physical and systemic

vulnerabilitywork opportunities possibility of na-tech disasters

* open spaces type, shape, facilities distances from residential/working areas; facilities inside

systemic vulnerability can be created where they did not exist before

management of property rights in the area

* access ways characteristics of designed access ways (internal/external)

width, shape, alternatives systemic vulnerability can be created where they did not exist before; can be changed and improved

careful design

Urban Restauration. Integration with existing/designed structural measures should be foreseen; residual risk assessed and tackled

substantial conservation of existing structures



permits to maintain the identity of historic centres

need to preserve population, activities, and create "safety" in ancient spaces

* buildings retrofitting vulnerability assessment for existing hazards (to be developed)


apart from public motiviation, need for specialists and workers with experience in buildings restauration and retrofitting (a sort of "practice code")

* networks generally have to be created vulnerability assessment tool physical and systemic vulnerability

impoves the environment difficult to intervene in already built areas

* industries compatibility with historic centres specific tools needed physical and systemic vulnerability

work opportunities possibility of na-tech disasters

* open spaces type and extent distances from residential/working areas; facilities inside

systemic vulnerability can be created through careful assessment of existing open spaces and connections among them



width, shape, alternatives systemic vulnerability existing ones should be managed to guarantee accessibility

careful design

Relocation relocation of settlements (parts of)

*hazard, *exposure,*vulnerability exposure reduces substantially the risk (and therefore expected damage)

very difficult tool; to be limited to highly critical situations

* buildings type of buildings * networks + facilities networks and facilities in the

relocation zone*hazard *exposure possibility to take into account

hazards in designing new facilities/infrastrctures

new networks and facilities (or imrpovement of existing ones) must be provided to resettlement areas

* industries/economic activities

type,dimension *hazard, *exposure,*vulnerability *exposure possibility to consider the compatibility of industries with residential and other urban functions

some economic activities are strongly rooted in a given environment and are difficult to move

Disclosure of hazards while selling land parcels/houses

*hazard; *exposure *exposure fairness to the buyer experience has shown little influence of disclosure on the market

Exi

stin

g se

ttlem

ents

/bui

lt ar

eas

Sup

port

to im

plem

enta

tion

Land

-use

, urb

an p

lann

ing

tool

s

* buildings retrofitting vulnerability assessment for existing hazards (to be developed)


apart from public motiviation, need for specialists and workers with experience in buildings restauration and retrofitting (a sort of "practice code")

* networks generally have to be created vulnerability assessment tool physical and systemic vulnerability

impoves the environment difficult to intervene in already built areas

* industries compatibility with historic centres specific tools needed physical and systemic vulnerability

work opportunities possibility of na-tech disasters

* open spaces type and extent distances from residential/working areas; facilities inside

systemic vulnerability can be created through careful assessment of existing open spaces and connections among them



width, shape, alternatives systemic vulnerability existing ones should be managed to guarantee accessibility

careful design

Relocation relocation of settlements (parts of)

*hazard, *exposure,*vulnerability exposure reduces substantially the risk (and therefore expected damage)

very difficult tool; to be limited to highly critical situations

* buildings type of buildings * networks + facilities networks and facilities in the

relocation zone*hazard *exposure possibility to take into account

hazards in designing new facilities/infrastrctures

new networks and facilities (or imrpovement of existing ones) must be provided to resettlement areas

* industries/economic activities

type,dimension *hazard, *exposure,*vulnerability *exposure possibility to consider the compatibility of industries with residential and other urban functions

some economic activities are strongly rooted in a given environment and are difficult to move

Disclosure of hazards while selling land parcels/houses

*hazard; *exposure *exposure fairness to the buyer experience has shown little influence of disclosure on the market

Transfer prop. rights from hazardous areas to safer zones

*exposure *exposure possibility to maintain the property value

dificult in already built context

Insurance against natural calamities *risk (expected damage) *risk (expected damage) important to connect insurance to land use management

in the absence of clear prevention policies insurance may encourage dangerous behaviors

Tax incentives tailored to the type of tool to be implemented

*hazard,*exposure, *vulnerability, *risk

*exposure, *vulnerability tax incentives (and the opposite) to encourage/discourage desired land uses and safe building construction

poorly used in the realm of natural hazards; generally opposed by the public

Communication and participatory practices

communication of risks and opportunities in the area; participation to land use decisions

*hazard,*exposure, *vulnerability, *risk

*exposure, *vulnerability people's participation to land use decisions is essential to achieve the full recognition of the need of given norms, such as building restriction, relocation etc.

apparently requires more time; risk of paternalism practices

Exi

stin

g se

ttlem

ents

/bui

lt ar

eas

Sup

port

to im

plem

enta

tion

Land

-use

, urb

an p

lann

ing

tool

s

DescriptionNeeded assessment input

Risk factors managed by the tool

Positive aspects Critical aspects

Zoning

division of the development areas according to different fucntions

*hazard; *future exposure; *future vulnerability

*hazard, *exposure,*vulnerability

traditional way to tackle the design of newly developed areas in order to guarantee compatibility

risk of rigidity in planning practices

* buildings

specify norms to deal with physical vulnerability

vulnerability assessment for existing hazards (to be developed) physical vulnerability

reduces substantially fatalities and economic damage

a strong public motivation needed to support and control implementation

* open spaces type, shape, facilities

distances from residential/working areas; facilities inside systemic vulnerability

can be created and design for multiple purposes (including

need for strong public control to avoid overexploitation at the

* access ways

characteristics of designed access ways (internal/external) width, shape, alternatives systemic vulnerability

can be created so as to serve the development area taking into consideration multiple need for good design

Locating new plants type, dimension


physical and systemic vulnerability

can be located assessing the compatibility with other designed urban

the compatibility must be "checked" over time

Locating new facilities + infrastructures type, dimension


physical and systemic vulnerability

can be located so as to guarantee equal access to all citizens and in safe areas (attracting private

need to go beyond the simple rule of "cheap land available"

Disclosureof hazards while selling land parcels/houses *hazard; *exposure *exposure fairness to the buyer

experience has shown little influence of disclosure on

Transfer prop. rights

from hazardous areas to safer zones *exposure *exposure

possibility to maintain the property value

requires excellent laws; generally proved to be difficult to implement; need to control areas from which

Insuranceagainst natural calamities *risk (expected damage) *risk (expected damage)

important to connect insurance to land use management

in the absence of clear prevention policies insurance may encourage

Tax incentivestailored to the type of tool to be implemented

*hazard,*exposure, *vulnerability, *risk *exposure, *vulnerability

tax incentives (and the opposite) to encourage/discourage

poorly used in the realm of natural hazards; generally opposed by the public

Communication and participatory practices

communication of risks and opportunities in the area; participation to land use decisions

*hazard,*exposure, *vulnerability, *risk *exposure, *vulnerability

people's participation to land use decisions is essential to achieve the full recognition of the need of given norms,

apparently requires more time; risk of paternalism practices

Land

-use

, urb

an p

lann

ing

tool

sS

uppo

rt to

impl

emen

tatio

n


Risk assessment



Economic tools: insurance

http://www.swissre.com/INTERNET/pwswpspr.nsf/alldocbyidkeylu/MSHS-4THMKX

http://www.swissre.com/INTERNET/pwswpspr.nsf/alldocbyidkeylu/MSHS-4THMKX

Economic tools: insurance: the French approach

Commune de Veurey-Voroize PLAN DE PREVENTION DES RISQUES NATURELS PREVISIBLES

ZONAGE REGLEMENTAIRE DU RISQUE hors débordement de l'Isère (sur fond topographique)

Nature du risque* :

I, i2, i3 : crues des fleuves et des rivières M : marécages I', i' : inondation de plaine en pied de versant T : crues des torrents et des rivières torrentielles V, v : ruissellement sur versant G, g1, g2 : glissement de terrain P, p : chutes de pierres f : suffosion, voir encart au 1/25 000è

Chaque zone est référencée par deux indices alphabétiques au moins : * le premier correspond au niveau de contraintes à appliquer ** le second à la nature du risque (caractère en minuscule pour les zones de faibles contraintes, caractère en majuscule pour les autres cas)

............ Limite communale

------------- Limite du zonage réglementaire présenté sur fond cadastral au 1/5000

Niveau de contraintes* :

Zones d'interdictions

Zone de projet possible sous maîtrise collective

Zones de contraintes faibles

Zones sans contraintes spécifiques

Réalisation : Alp'Géorisques Etabli le : 25 mars 1999

Edition : Alp'Géorisques Modifiée le : juillet 2000 (RTM et SEER)

Echelle : 1/10 000

Economic tools: insurance

Economic tools: real estate disclosure. Does it work?

http://images.google.it/imgres?imgurl=http://www.therealtygram.com/j0286972.gif&imgrefurl=http://therealtygram.typepad.com/realtygram_blogger/2005/03/index.html&h=231&w=242&sz=6&hl=it&start=3&tbnid=hX0M-IZOyPzENM:&tbnh=105&tbnw=110&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dreal%2Bestate%2Bdisclosure%2Bhazards%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Dit%26sa%3DN

introduction to risk assessment and management in developing countries

Documents

risk assessment

milano indexrisk mitigation

international context

source cred emdat